Arachnid wrote:Reminder: This here is a for profit corporate business professional ice hockey team.

It is not, repeat, not yours. It's sole purpose is to MAKE MONEY.

As the guy who started this thread about a for profit corporate business professional ice hockey team, I'm not sure what you're going on here about, but thank you VERY MUCH for the useful refresher on the profit motive.

Arachnid wrote:Reminder: This here is a for profit corporate business professional ice hockey team.

It is not, repeat, not yours. It's sole purpose is to MAKE MONEY.

As the guy who started this thread about a for profit corporate business professional ice hockey team, I'm not sure what you're going on here about, but thank you VERY MUCH for the useful refresher on the profit motive.

Arachnid wrote:I mean, can the Sabres & Oilers be THAT bad again?

Yes.

didn't you get the memo?

are you not part of the CC elite?!

I am the harbinger of the darkness, the light of evil, preacher of the unknown path, the cook of poison

We've got an outside shot at #6, Car, Nash, and Ott have games in hand. If they all pass, could be 6, and also a slightly improved chance in the lottery for #1.

I realize they did not tank intentionally tonight, but man if anyone wanted to make that accusation, you could. Amazing meltdown. That was mid-1980s era levels of incompetence, but at least back then we didn't have any expectations of success and just waited for Gretzky and co to ragdoll us and call it a season.

Can't see Bennett available at 6. Virtanen probably, Ehlers maybe. I'd be happy with any of Reinhart, Bennett, DalColle, Draisaitl or Ehlers. Would also like Ritchie or Virtanen. Lots of good forwards at the top of this draft, but very few D and it drops off after the 8 or 9 pick.

With the way this team is playing they should be in contention for a top 10 and maybe as high as 6.

Diehard1 wrote:Can't see Bennett available at 6. Virtanen probably, Ehlers maybe. I'd be happy with any of Reinhart, Bennett, DalColle, Draisaitl or Ehlers. Would also like Ritchie or Virtanen. Lots of good forwards at the top of this draft, but very few D and it drops off after the 8 or 9 pick.

With the way this team is playing they should be in contention for a top 10 and maybe as high as 6.

SKYO wrote:Be nice to draft a sleeper top dman like Fleury or Honka seeing as we all of a sudden got a some forward prospect depth.

I know you're on HFBoards so you've probably seen people bandy about the difficulty of scouting for high end ability (that is likely to actually pan out) among defenders, which is a big part of why there is such a stark difference in the draft positions of the players at each position who end up turning into top players..

Or look at our own team, compare the top six defensemen (12, NA, 151, NA, NA, 91) with our top six forwards (2, 3, 23, 14, 178, 13).

We've already got Corrado and Hutton looking pretty promising (both fifth round picks I might add) and we've been pretty good and pulling defensemen from free agency (half our top six) so I really don't agree that there's a strong need to take a blueliner ten spots above where they're ranked.

Unless there's a situation like Cam Fowler in 2010 where you've got a bona fide top five talent freefalling in the draft, I'd much rather continue to build the forward group (and really in this draft and given where we'll likely pick that'd be Ekblad). This draft seems like a good opportunity to add either a sizeable winger with pretty good scoring ability, or a top end talent like Nylander or Ehlers.. given the way the 4-15ish rankings seem to bounce around I hope there is a good shot that the Canucks can nab a real talented player who drops.

Unless Shea Weber Jr or Zdeno Chara Jr are available, I wouldn't worry about drafting a defenceman. Edler and Garrison are by no means getting old. Tanev and Stanton are future top four guys. Hutton and Corrado are promising prospects, and Andersson has been getting good reviews as well as a big stay at home guy.

What we need to worry about is replacing Hank. We can potentially replace Kesler, Burrows and even Daniel with our current prospect depth, but the issue is going to be that #1C. I don't think anybody thinks Horvat, Gaunce or Fox are future PPG, #1 centers in the NHL. That needs to be management's focus.

Somehow trading up to get Bennett or Reinhart would be amazing. Maybe there's a scenario where we take what we get in the Kesler trade and flip it for the #1 spot.

6'3 198lbs Fleury is a rangy, mobile defenseman who has brought a valuable batch of offensive skills to the backend in Red Deer. In his rookie season, he collected 19 points in 66 games, numbers that he has already surpassed this year. Through 43 games, Fleury has tallied six times and added 24 assists in an expanded role with the Rebels. His +13 rating is tops on the team so far this season.

According to NHL Central Scouting, Fleury plays a solid two-way game and is an excellent skater who uses his speed to be effective at both ends of the rink. He is among the best defensemen in the current class at utilizing his skating and puck movement skills to create odd-man opportunities.

herb wrote:What we need to worry about is replacing Hank. We can potentially replace Kesler, Burrows and even Daniel with our current prospect depth, but the issue is going to be that #1C. I don't think anybody thinks Horvat, Gaunce or Fox are future PPG, #1 centers in the NHL. That needs to be management's focus.

Can we end the Hank PPG myth.

3 of 13 seasons he's been PPG. Two more at a point under so we'll give him those too. That's 5 of 13 or a bit better than 38% of his career.